SP+ Week 14: M #4, Georgia still #1
From Bill Connelly:
Yes, Georgia remains No. 1 after its demoralizing loss to Alabama in the SEC championship. That was all but guaranteed because of the Bulldogs' enormous advantage over the field heading into the weekend. The Dawgs were 5.5 points ahead of Ohio State, 7.3 ahead of Alabama, 9.2 ahead of Michigan and 11.5 ahead of Cincinnati a week ago, and this deep into the season one game simply isn't going to make that big of a difference.
As you see, however, the gap closed pretty significantly. The Dawgs' advantage over the field shrank by about three points against each top team, which is as big a shift as you'll see at this point in the year. And as you would expect, Alabama closed the gap on Ohio State too.
In résumé SP+, which looks at actual results vs. the average top-five team, the top 5 was Georgia, OSU, Alabama, Michigan, Cincinnati. In loss-adjusted SP+, the top 5 was Georgia, Alabama, Cincinnati, Michigan, OSU.
Top 10 below. Other top 50 B1G teams: OSU 2, Wisc 9, PSU 16, Minny 20, Iowa 32, MSU 35, Nebraska 37, Purdue 40.
December 6th, 2021 at 8:50 AM ^
If we purely look at defensive SP+, given that Georgia still ranks #1 there, Michigan has beaten defenses ranked #2 (Wisconsin, 38-17), #4 (Iowa, 42-3), and #6 (Penn State, 21-17).
December 6th, 2021 at 9:03 AM ^
There you go...and kicked the ass of an elite offense!!!
December 6th, 2021 at 9:05 AM ^
Kind of a big difference that Georgia averages about 40 points a game and has a top 5 statistical offense and those three teams have, not that
December 6th, 2021 at 9:23 AM ^
Did you not watch the OSU game? They had the #15 defense when we played them. That ain't exactly chopped liver... And they still have the #2 offense.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:29 AM ^
Georgia has played exactly one top 10 team this year, and they got their asses kicked. Clemson held them to 10 points, and almost everyone on their schedule is having a down year.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:36 AM ^
Clemson held them to 3 offensive points. The only touchdown in that game was a pick 6.
December 6th, 2021 at 10:02 AM ^
Georgia's offensive production benefitted greatly from a lot of turnovers and short fields generated by their defense. When they had "normal" field position, you saw how much they struggled against a non-vintage Alabama defense.
Their running game is not particularly explosive, and Bennett won't beat anyone by himself, even with a healthy Pickens.
December 6th, 2021 at 8:58 AM ^
Interesting that of the top four teams, the lower ranked S&P+ team demolished the higher ranked team it played over the last couple weeks. So while those numbers are interesting, that is all they are.
December 6th, 2021 at 8:58 AM ^
Do these analytics take into account how offense and special teams affects defensive performance? Time of possession, scoring enough points, not putting the D on a short field via turnover or bad special teams play, etc.
December 6th, 2021 at 8:58 AM ^
We have beaten the #1 offense, the number #2, #4, #6 defenses, and #1, and #2 special teams. Bring on the SEC.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:04 AM ^
#1 at being Bama's bitch
Call them SEC Iowa because their stats and records are a reflection of their schedule, not their actual ability
December 6th, 2021 at 9:05 AM ^
I just feel so bad for OSU for not making the playoffs. Hahahahahahaha. I still can't get over the fact that they walked into the Big House thinking it was going to be just like all the past games there the last 9 years. And the great thing about it is that Ryan Day was the leader of over confidence with the team. Go Blue!
December 6th, 2021 at 9:09 AM ^
It wasn't over confidence, they were sick.
~s
December 6th, 2021 at 9:06 AM ^
Wisconsin is #9 and couldn’t even win the B1G West. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
December 6th, 2021 at 9:06 AM ^
Man MSU got screwed in their bowl game. I didn't realize Pitt was a top-10 SP+ team. And given that their offense if pass based, not looking good for their D.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:13 AM ^
It'll be Tucker's first reasonable test. No way were they keeping up with OSU, but a bowl matchup like this with almost a month to prepare will say a lot about how good of a coach he actually is.
If they can win despite their limitations in the secondary I'll be impressed.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:22 AM ^
I think he's had reasonable tests before, some of which he passed and some not. I haven't seen much of Pitt except for their QB's highlights and know they pass the ball a lot, but I'm a bit weary of any non-Clemson/FSU recruited ACC team at this point. I gotta think the big question is whether Walker plays. If he's set on going to NFL does he think a bowl game will help his stock enough to risk injury before workouts? Or is he coming back next year even though he's probably going to win the Doak Walker?
December 6th, 2021 at 9:18 AM ^
Pitt is a paper tiger. Acc is globally overrated. Pitt lost to wmu who we shitcanned.
December 6th, 2021 at 12:40 PM ^
Minnesota lost to Bowling Green and then ruined Wisconsin’s chance at a rematch with us in the B10 championship game. While I agree the ACC is overrated, college football is all about matchups and Pitt is an awful matchup for Sparty. Possibly the first QB off the boards in the next nfl draft against the worst pass defense in college football.
That Pitt/WMU game was also nearly 3 months ago. Pitt is a much different team than it was in September
December 6th, 2021 at 9:30 AM ^
Hey guys remember when we held the #1 offense in the country to 20 points below their season average and scored 42 against two top twenty SP+ defenses
December 6th, 2021 at 9:48 AM ^
No way, next you’re going to try and get us to believe Keith Jackson is dead! I for one am not falling for it!
December 6th, 2021 at 9:58 AM ^
The problem is that UM's offense didn't do super great on a down to down basis against those other good defenses. How much more can Gattis and Harbaugh break tendancies or rely on a big play? Can they pull off another flea flicker?
Second is that UGA's offense is not built like OSUs. Honestly, I think I might have preferred Bama since they run the same pro-style passing spread OSU does with a young QB. UM brought in McDonald specifically to combat that. Not sure how they match up with UGA's less explosive, but still very effecient offense.
December 6th, 2021 at 10:16 AM ^
How much more can Gattis and Harbaugh break tendancies or rely on a big play? Can they pull off another flea flicker?
(shrug) maybe the bag isn't empty yet :)
Second is that UGA's offense is not built like OSUs. Honestly, I think I might have preferred Bama since they run the same pro-style passing spread OSU does with a young QB. UM brought in McDonald specifically to combat that. Not sure how they match up with UGA's less explosive, but still very effecient offense.
The data point we have for less "explosive" offenses is the one against Michigan State. Yes, Michigan didn't hold up as well against them, but I have this belief that the defense has learned a lot since then. Let's see what the FFFF says.
December 6th, 2021 at 12:50 PM ^
Michigan leads college football in plays of 50-more yards, and is top-10 in plays of 40+-yards. Big plays has been a main component of this offense all season long. They aren’t accidental nor merely the result of breaking a tendency. Tip of the hat to Georgia if they’re able to eliminate them.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:40 AM ^
Ga #1 and OSU #2 doesnt this make this measuring stick TOTALLY invalid unreliable and not worthy of our attention?
December 6th, 2021 at 10:22 AM ^
No. With only 12 games and football just generally being a fluky game, the margin of error on game predictions is probably something like +-14 points. That's generally not good for predicting individual games, but it's good enough for predicting games in aggregate. What that basically implies is that if all teams were to play a round robin, Georgia and OSU would be the most likely to have the most wins. I don't think that's a horrible assertion to make. Every week, he posts how he's doing against the spread. Most years, he has something like 57%. Someone mentioned the other day that, this year, he's 48%. Being on par with Vegas is not a bad place to be. But, your assertion that this is totally invalid, unreliable, and not worth of our attention implies that Vegas odds are also totally invalid, unreliable, and not worthy of our attention, which is obviously false because the make a lot of money by being valid and (relatively) reliable and, thus, are worthy of our attention.
December 6th, 2021 at 11:33 AM ^
No, because these are meant to be predictive moving forward, not an assessment of deservedness looking backward. And they are as good as any public formula in predicting both Vegas lines and outcomes.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:48 AM ^
Besides the fact that Bryce Young is ridiculous, the biggest takeaway here is that the better coaches have been winning later in the year. When everyone knows which players can do what, it comes down to adjusting your team and exploiting matchups. Aranda over Gundy, Saban stole Kirby's lunch, Fickell just all around and Day got his ass beat by Harbaugh and Co.
December 6th, 2021 at 9:54 AM ^
Two things:
1. It is a math formula. It is pretty good at things like realizing that Nebraska is way better than their 3-9 record would have you believe, or in early-October realizing that Michigan was way better than the AP or coaches polls believed. But...it is not great at ordinally ranking teams 1-5. Top 5 are too closely clustered together in quality to have any formula that ranks ordinally get it right. With a data set of just 13 games this is unavoidable.
2. Michigan v. Georgia: Whatever the rank, they are very close in quality. The winner will turn on (1) which team has the better game plans (offense and defense), (2) which team plays well/not so well on that day, (3) whether there are any one-on-one match-ups that will decidedly favor one of the two teams (such as Hutchinson/Ojabo vs. Georgia's offensive tackles, etc.).
Even though Michigan and Georgia are really close in terms of overall quality/rank, it could still be sort of one-sided in favor of Michigan, or in favor of Georgia.
Michigan v. OSU is a great example. Fact: OSU is really good (ugh!). It is not wrong to think they are somewhere in the top 5, despite two losses.
But on all three--game plan, played well on game day, and game skewing match-up (OSU could not handle Hutchinson/Ojabo and they got sacks and many pressures)--Michigan was better than OSU.
As a result, the game was not close. Michigan was in control of the game and won by 15, and but for several OSU highlight reel catches would have won by 25+. But that does not mean that OSU is 15+ points worse than Michigan (which would imply OSU ranked around no. 20, etc.).
Parting shot: The way the committee did this, in order to win it all Michigan will have to beat SP+ no. 2 (OSU; done), no. 1 Georgia (you are next!), and no. 3 Alabama (see you in Indy!).
December 6th, 2021 at 10:01 AM ^
No matter what statistical formula you use in college football, you can only look at the games actually played. And there's a few things to note there:
- Georgia was not really troubled in any of their games outside Alabama. The Clemson game was the closest one otherwise and Clemson scored 3 points. That is pretty impressive and not matched by the other one loss teams i.e. Bama and Michigan. And you need to be very focused and execute very well to maintain that level of supremacy playing a P5 conference schedule. As a result it's obvious why the computer would favor them.
- On the flip side, Georgia's opponents are overall not so impressive to the point where you feel Georgia should have any air of invincibility. Much of the Georgia hype was based on good timing. They beat Clemson when Clemson was most highly regarded i.e. when all you had was pre-season hype. Clemson's offense turned out to be pretty pedestrian, but that wasn't known when Georgia held them to 3 points.
After that Georgia beat up on some minnows, before Arkansas came to town. Arkansas at that time was also at the height of its hype, they were undefeated and had beaten Texas (again also early when they were assumed to be very good) and TAMU (again also at a time when they were still hyped as a CFP contender). Now Arkansas isn't a bad team, but it isn't the #8 team in the country which is where Arkansas was ranked when Georgia played them. Georgia blanked them, which actually is quite impressive, but less impressive than would have been assumed at the time.
They then dispatched Auburn, Kentucky, Florida, Missouri and Tennessee without difficulty. That is again pretty impressive even if all of those teams are flawed to some extent. Those teams have a combined season record of 34-27 with the plus .500 portion there mostly delivered by Kentucky.
I think all in all, it's both very much fair to say that Georgia played an excellent regular season that should never be taken for granted and that Georgia very much deserves to be in the playoff. It's however also fair to say that they have not shown so far any indication that they're a team that is a clear level above the other top teams. If they played OSU next Saturday, I'd say OSU has more than a fair chance.
I think for Michigan this is a bit of a 'show me' game. There are almost certainly observers who can say that Michigan is really just your regular 10-15 ranked team that happened to beat OSU in the snow in a 'weird game' and then got to beat up on an overrated Iowa in the B1GCG and thus 'slip' into the playoff. In that case, it's the sort of game Georgia would win 34-10 or something. But if Michigan is actually as good as a team that beats OSU by 3 scores and then demolishes a 10 win team in a conference title game then there's no reason to believe Michigan doesn't have a chance.and can't hang with Georgia.
December 6th, 2021 at 10:28 AM ^
Those rankings suck. When you have 4 loss teams in the top 10 obviously something is wrong with it. Common sense and the eye test is better then these.
December 7th, 2021 at 2:41 AM ^
Sooo close to the official template :<)
-----
FO Angry Troll Mad Lib: Template created by reader zlionsfan to be used when fans who are unfamiliar with FO's statistical methods wish to complain about the placement of their favorite team in that week's FOXSports.com power rankings (based on DVOA). Reads as follows:
<team> is clearly ranked <too high/too low> because <reason unrelated to DVOA>. <subjective ranking system> is way better than this. <unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling>
-----
December 6th, 2021 at 11:09 AM ^
The CFP rankings matter. Those SP+ numbers are mumbo/jumbo to me. Ohio Sate does not belong in the Top 4. They are a #6 team as done in the CFP rankings.
December 6th, 2021 at 11:35 AM ^
Any time SP+ is posted, there needs to be a primer explaining what SP+ is. (Predictive, forward-looking, not "deservedness"-based or backward looking.)
Not that there won't still be people bringing poll-thinking into this, claiming that (or, better, the 'eye test') invalidates SP+. (Hint: the 'eye test' built Las Vegas.)
December 6th, 2021 at 11:37 AM ^
Let's see. Should I trust a formula that places two teams that were humiliated by their arch rivals in the last 9 days over the teams that did the humiliating? Or should I trust the football gods? Oh wait, didn't OSU have the flu or something?
December 6th, 2021 at 11:48 AM ^
Football will always be about matchups. The #3 team might beat the #1 but then struggle against the #6 team. Everyone has different strengths and weaknesses and matches up differently.
December 6th, 2021 at 11:49 AM ^
We're in the College Football Playoffs. That's pretty cool.
December 6th, 2021 at 12:29 PM ^
Any ranking that has that soft team from Columbus near the top is full of shit.
December 6th, 2021 at 12:34 PM ^
we won the big ten east.
then we won the big ten west (by beating Iowa).
now we gotta win the sec east (georgia).
then we gotta win the sec west (alabama).
it actually makes sense.